Samsaric Spiral wrote:I think its completely reasonable not to let Muslims into this country for a while.

Absolutly! A vetting process that is clear and, to some extend effective. No muslim sensitivity is worth one innocent life.American lives matter man.

We already have a very adequate vetting process. It takes over 3 years. I'm all for letting them in! Absolutely!

BTW, the so-called "for a while" is a GOP tactic/lie to make sure it never happens.

I don't buy into this fear... we should be afraid of the mass shootings, about 350 or so this year perpetrated by American extremists and crazies on Americans... and I won't buy into that either. I will support banning guns, a dream, even now... so sad.

Speaking generally, yes. We're (EU and USA) different cultures, for the most part, and are separated by a good expanse of salt water, ...to both sides' pleasure, we all admit.

As far as "rules" are concerned, I don't know the reference. Each nation will vet prospective immigrants and asylum-seekers as needed. USA does a very thorough job on this. Some say we should do less, some say more. Somewhere -- like where we are now! -- we may be OK.

I have tents and a Yurt in the yard, and will take Sufis temporarily anytime, but Jihadists, NO.

At the airport PM Trudeau just warmly welcomed the first of 25,000 Syrian refugees to be accepted in Canada by the end of February. Families were given teddy bears and winter clothing. As a citizen of the US I am ashamed by the contrast.

Caodemarte wrote:At the airport PM Trudeau just warmly welcomed the first of 25,000 Syrian refugees to be accepted in Canada by the end of February. Families were given teddy bears and winter clothing. As a citizen of the US I am ashamed by the contrast.

My sentiments also, I am ashamed as an America. It is not enough to salute other countries. The seeds of hatred and violence are growing daily and it must stop. The US has caused more suffering than any other country round the world. We can start at home, the only place where us'ns can do anything.

This may be over the line... it's time. For God's sake, go beyond this....

Donald Trump on refugees, this is an idea that will never happen... yet it encourages fear and xenophobia....

Demagoguery is an appeal to people that plays on their emotions and prejudices rather than on their rational side.

Demagoguery is a manipulative approach — often associated with dictators and sleazy politicians — that appeals to the worst nature of people. Demagoguery isn't based on reason, issues, and doing the right thing; it's based on stirring up fear and hatred to control people. For example, a politician who stirs up a fear of immigrants to distract from other issues is using demagoguery. Demagoguery is one of the most negative aspects of politics, but it's also one that's all too common.

Gulf Arabs are dangerous both genetically and ideologically. I will defend this assertion. Whereas Persians and Lebanese have become model minorities, the same cannot be said for Gulf Arabs. Pakistanis were brainwashed by Wahhabist propaganda btw. I will get into that more.

Saudi Arabia is the ISIS equivalent of a state and has exported Wahhabism around the Middle East to destablize it. They also funded Al Queda and had an alleged link with 9/11. Ironically, America and Saudi Arabia are the biggest allies.

"Part of the legacy of Ronald Reagan during the Reagan years, Pakistan was ruled by the most awful of its many horrible dictators, Zia-ul-Haq, and he had two major policies, one was to carry out radical Islamization of the country, with the funding of Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is the center of radical Islam, and also the center of funding of Jihadism. And also the leading ally of the United States and Britain. Traditionally, the US and Britain have been supporting radical Islam throughout the region, and there are good reasons for that, and they continue to. The reasons are to--you can tell it from the internal documents; British and American internal documents--the reason is kind of a rational analysis. The real threat they say, is the virus of secular nationalism; that's dangerous. Secular nationalism, say Nasser for example, can lead to the possibility of efforts to try to take the resources of the region and use them for their own populations, rather than for the benefit of the West and the ruling super rich ruling families. So that's a real problem. And the only barrier to secular nationalism, to the virus of secular nationalism as it's called, is radical Islamism. So the US, and Britain as well, have been strongly supporting radical Islam for a long time, and continue to; it's a little ironic when you hear them complaining about the Muslim brotherhood, which by comparison, is moderate Islam. And that remains true, Saudi Arabia for example, is given free reign to crush demonstrations, no talk of ‘no fly zones’. There was a Day of Rage called in Riyadh, but the police presence was so extensive that nobody could even show up; they're too intimidated, same in Kuwait. These are rich oil states, which have loyal dictators, so therefore they're free to do anything they like. Bahrain is pretty much the same story, they're worried about the spill over to Saudi Arabia, and that's you know, what happened there. Well in this case the Saudi Arabian funding of radical Islamism which actually began in the early 60s, kind of a missionary effort to spread radical Islamic Wahhabi type Islamism all throughout the Islamic world, massive funding, madrassas and you know, so on, that penetrated Pakistan in the 1980s, and a lot of these reformist lawyers came out of those madrassas, they've had a big effect on Pakistan, and at the same time, Zia-ul-Haq was developing nuclear weapons; the Reagan administration pretended--and the British--pretended they didn't know it--of course they did--so that they could continue to fund their favorite dictator in Pakistan.”— Noam Chomsky (source)

Sunni Muslims destroyed Lebanon, Iraq, Libya and now they're doing the same with Syria. It's of course always convenient if one is of Sunni Muslim background, to blame it on the "regime" and "dictator", but reality is that Sunni Muslims are not adults, and they should never be given any political power, nor weapons or any influence whatsoever. What was wrong with Lebanon in 1975 that Sunni Muslims had to ruin it? What was wrong with Syria in 2011 that they had to ruin it? By no means were they perfect countries, but in all the Arab world, Maronite Lebanon, Baathist Syria and Baathist Iraq were the most tolerant of Christians. And that's the main reason why these countries are being destroyed now.

Iran actually has a potential to reconnect with its Pre-Islamic roots (Zoroastrianism) and leave behind Islam, which is basically what Kurds are slowly doing, but there is no way Saudi Arabia will ever be secularized. Furthermore, they have a massive in-breeding problems, and they still have slaves. Gulf Arabs are very dangerous:

"Statistical research on Arabic countries shows that up to 34 percent of all marriages in Algiers are consanguine (blood related), 46 percent in Bahrain, 33 percent in Egypt, 80 percent in Nubia (southern area in Egypt), 60 percent in Iraq, 64 percent in Jordan, 64 percent in Kuwait, 42 percent in Lebanon, 48 percent in Libya, 47 percent in Mauritania, 54 percent in Qatar, 67 percent in Saudi Arabia, 63 percent in Sudan, 40 percent in Syria, 39 percent in Tunisia, 54 percent in the United Arabic Emirates and 45 percent in Yemen (Reproductive Health Journal, 2009 Consanguinity and reproductive health among Arabs.). "

Gulf Arabs are dangerous both genetically and ideologically. I will defend this assertion. Whereas Persians and Lebanese have become model minorities, the same cannot be said for Gulf Arabs. Pakistanis were brainwashed by Wahhabist propaganda btw

I am personally embarrassed at having such a statement on this forum. Substitute 'Gulf Arabs' with some other well known ethnic/social/religious groups and what can it remind us of?

Gulf Arabs are dangerous both genetically and ideologically. I will defend this assertion. Whereas Persians and Lebanese have become model minorities, the same cannot be said for Gulf Arabs. Pakistanis were brainwashed by Wahhabist propaganda btw

I am personally embarrassed at having such a statement on this forum. Substitute 'Gulf Arabs' with some other well known ethnic/social/religious groups and what can it remind us of?

m

I substantiated my claim. ~60%, if not more, of Saudis are inbred. I'm not using this as an insult, just stating facts. Over a majority of Islamic terrorism can also be traced back to the Saudis. They after all funded the 9/11 attackers and are, paradoxically, allies with the West.

Nature/nurture is 50/50. In the past, I used to not be a racial realist, but after looking into counterarguments more, I've taken a 50/50 approach. I think, in general, Saudis or most Gulf Arabs are prone to violent tendencies and lack sophistication or intelligence on average. Unlike Assyrians, Persians, Kurds, etc., they have accomplished absolutely nothing noteworthy in history. They still have slaves for crying out loud:

"Prejudice is an organic truth, false in itself but accumulated by generations and transmitted: we cannot rid ourselves of it with impunity. The nation that renounces it heedlessly will then renounce itself until it has nothing left to give up. The duration of a collectivity and its consistency coincide with the duration and consistency of its prejudices. The Oriental nations owe their everlastingness to their loyalty to themselves."- Emil Cioran

It was Nixon's agreement with Saudis that they require all payments in dollars and we protect them. They hold us by the balls - once they start accepting payments in other currencies, dollar will collapse. It's led to a crazy predicament.

I speak my own mind, and I'm not a politically correct coward. The Saudis are to blame for the majority of the problems in the Middle East and this is empirically verifiable, as the Chomsky quote showed. Islam is just a political tool of Gulf Arabs to subjugate Assyrians, Persians, and other non-Arab Middle Easterns. They have genocided Persians, Assyrians, etc. countless times throughout history.

Samsaric Spiral wrote:I think, in general, Saudis or most Gulf Arabs are prone to violent tendencies and lack sophistication or intelligence on average.

WTF????????

Samsaric Spiral,

The language you use here (and in other posts on this thread) is racist and offensive. Race-based generalized insults are NOT OK and should NOT be tolerated on this forum. I've reported your post to the moderaters and ask that they step in with a public clarification on the matter. Your language is racist, inflammatory hate speech & constitutes a violation of forum Terms of Service.

Moderators, please step in.

"One does not discover new lands without consenting to lose sight of the shore for a very long time." -Andrè Gide

Gulf Arabs are dangerous both genetically and ideologically. I will defend this assertion.

ok, when I first read that I was ready to join the "me too" ppl .... racist, shameful. Well, that is a valid view, yet we all know that we're living in a world of shadows. So, I read it again, hoping to catch SS in a projection just to disprove the idea ... the old cold war trick of ascribing evil to the enemy, often Russia, in service to myself... hoping all the while that you don't notice the shadow that I cast. It seems important to remember that the enemy is every changing, them and us, us and them... at play in the realm of duality. The beautiful thing here is that we/them are caught in a death lock for truth when there isn't any. It's beautiful bec it gives us a chance to see more if we are lucky. Rather than ascribing qualities like evil, racist, etc. it seems to me that zen, if that is such a thing, might see it for what it is.... therefore, we would know how to treat the barbarians in Saudi Arabia with appropriate action.... well, gee, like not supporting them, not prostituting our country for the sake of their oil. If you are not reading the alternate press, you will not see the whole pic. The eternal truth is that it's a mystery how we create our enemies until your eyes are open.

So is it true that Saudi's are dangerous, that seems clear enough... they are. Is it genetic... in some cases sadly, just as we repeat patterns in our own families. So, I will withdraw my personal reaction... it just isn't that easy! It is very, very important to understand this is a political conversation, ofc there are generalities yet each country carries it's own vibration of humanity. Ontology recapitulates philology.... contemplate that. The concept has largely been discredited, yet it's worthy to reconsider. It's not limited to the Gulf Arabs, how does it work in our lives.

SS, I'd encourage you to also consider how the US has been responsibly for meddling and creating this nightmare. Blame will not bring resolution, yet we need to see the whole pic for what it is. Do not underestimate how climate change has been quietly behind the scene for many years.... as I said above, if anyone noticed. Everyone needs food, water and a way to care for themselves, their family and their future kin.

Lastly, I'd counsel against deleting one word of this thread. While we may disagree, this is a worthy conversation. After I came down to earth, I do not see ill will to any of our participants. The last thing we need in this age is more censorship like what is currently happening on college campuses as well as alternative medical treatments... not to mention Bernie who got a total of 10 minutes of national nightly news ALL year compared to nearly 300 for Trump.

We just don't know what could come out of this conversation, and for who.

linda

SS (and us).... It's always good to know the territory, that is, how to introduce hard truths to good ppl who may not be ready to see self and/or other.... or may get side tracked by a mistaken reaction temporarily. It's best to understand tender mercies in sensitive areas... that does not mean bending the truth, but skill in presenting it so ppl don't shut down. I often feel that I say things left unexplained .... it's for others to sit with or it may be helpful to lead the horse to water.... it's a call. I know it's not easy tho I suspect you can become a master at it. You love enough.

When I read "genetically", I thought it might just be empty. But in fact, there's something to it. The Saudi royal family is a genetic-line. I don't know the details of how it operates, in peopling hereditary offices of the government there with officers. But I just received a copy of THE CIA FACTBOOK -- 2016. So, I can read a brief version of how their hereditary government postings may be structured.

Thus far I've only read entries on Cuba, UK, USA, and Andorra.

It may be that sections of THE CIA FACTBOOK are also online, but I do not know. The entirety of the book has been assembled by the CIA with taxpayer dollars, and it can be copied freely. It may thus also be put-up on line, but, again, I haven't looked there. I have the very large, very fat paperback in hand.